"I will fight any effort to further infringe on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens, whether it is legislation or executive action by the president," Burr said. "I am open to having a conversation about ways in which our nation can address mental health issues and reduce violence, but I will not stand by while the president and others try to restrict the rights of law-abiding American citizens."

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions
of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

I have read the 23 Executive Actions several times. Just looking at them you think “nothing there”, and then it dawned on me. President Obama is turning it over to his hand-picked bureaucrats and department heads. This places it in the hands of the “regulators”. So now he can have the rules and regulations he wants and they will have the force of law just as if they were passed by congress. Look at what the EPA has done. Now look at what these people will do to your 2nd Amendment rights.

Why does Sen. Burr's reaction not surprise me? It doesn't sound as if either he or Rep. Renee Ellmers even listened to the President's plan. President Obama even went so far as to offer federal support for those who want armed security guards at their schools. He predicted such reactions. He knows you too well, just as we do. I espected nothing less from you, Mr. Burr. And I grow weary of your persistant attitude that it's more important to fight the President than it is to do what's right.

Oh boy, he offered support. Meanwhile, his kids get armed protection. Senator Burr is not fighting Reichskanzler Obama. He is fighting for our Constitutional rights, that Dear Leader is destroying everyday he shows up to work. We are a little fortunate that he is one of the more vacationing and golf playing Presidents.

Thank you for your support of the constitution. I wish all of our elected representatives across the the United States of America would keep their oath of up-holding the constitution, those that don't should not serve again. Sadly this is not the case too often. Please be steadfast. The solution is way tougher penalties to those not following the laws set while not infringing on our constitutional rights. Are we at a state that we pass laws that infringe on 99.995% of law abiding people that up hold our laws? Too what end, Marxism or Socialism?

I have been intersted and will watch closely if Burr is true of his word, I know Hagan bends with the wind and needs to be gone. this is a country that is founded on the constitution and bill of rights and laws, when one fails to recognize this then we are failed, we have an administration that just ran a program called FAST AND FURIOUS south of the border and yet no one has answered for it, even though a lot of innocents were murdered, the president comes from a city with the most restrictive rights to self protection in the nation and yet has the highest murdr rate, so why when he was a senator from Chicago he couldn't get a handle on one city but yet people trust him to control the world, so yesr, Senator Burr, we do expect you to hold our constitutional rights to the front of the burner.

On a side note, you will not see one gun owner that disagrees with a background check, so why not start at the top and work your way down?

Assault riles in 1776 were muzzle loaders with bayonets. What started the shooting at the beginning of the Revolution was not when a bunch of Tea was dumped, but when the dictator ordered the confiscation of the firearms. BUT that is not the point. We, as Americans, have the right to buy firearms if we want to. What you call an assault rifle is NOT an assault rifle. An assault rifle is a military weapon. The assault rifle today has the ability to fire fully automatic or in multiple round burst. It is not just the looks of the firearm and that is what all of the liberals hate. The looks of the firearm! As for magazines that have more than a few rounds, what difference would it make? As a Marine I was trained to change out magazine in one or two seconds. To practice changing mags we would fire 5 rounds, hit the release, drop the mag and slap in a new one. So how would outlawing 20 round magazines make a difference?

No and when the constitution was written the forefathers never envisioned an administration like was in place today that was so bent on detroying the american way of life, which makes their wisdom so long ago even more precious in todays times.

No they were not in question at the time. What the British had were muskets(a smooth bore and a very inaccurate weapon), however what we had were Kentucky Riffles, which had groves inside the bore to make it the ASSAULT weapon of the day. It was very accurate unlike the enemies we faced and was a superior weapon of its day. So to your argument where is my M1A1 Tank??? Learn history and about weapons before you start blabbing about what you think you know.